Daily Archives: November 21, 2025

Brad’s “late night” movie review: THE NAKED CAGE (1986), starring Shari Shattuck and Angel Tompkins!

Posted on by Bradley Crain

It’s a hard knock life for Michelle (Shari Shattuck). One moment she’s a hardworking teller at the local bank who loves her horse, Misty. The next moment she’s sentenced to three years in the women’s penitentiary for a crime she didn’t commit. And life is damn tough in prison. There’s the prison warden Diane (Angel Tompkins) who, when she’s not participating in lesbian dalliances with inmates, is offering Michelle protection, but only if she agrees to act as a spy for her. When Michelle says no, Diane sets her up to be brutalized by the sadistic Rita (Christina Whitaker), the bitch who’s responsible for her being in the pen in the first place! Now having to dodge the threat of rape from prison guard Smiley (Nick Benedict), as well as the constant threat of shiv-induced death at the hands of Rita, it seems Michelle may have finally received a lifeline with the arrival of a new prison guard named Rhonda (Lucinda Crosby). Rhonda seems to show some extra interest and empathy in Michelle’s plight, and she just may be in a position to help her with the wrongful conviction. That is, if Michelle can survive one more night in THE NAKED CAGE!! 

Recently, I’ve been trying to watch movies I’ve never seen before that star actors or actresses who worked with Charles Bronson. Tonight, I decided to look for a film starring Angel Tompkins, a Facebook friend, who worked with Bronson in the 1986 cop film from Cannon Films called MURPHY’S LAW. In that film she plays Jack Murphy’s ill-fated ex-wife, where she gives an uninhibited and committed performance in what would have been a throwaway role for many actresses. Not Angel… she took the role very seriously and is actually quite memorable in her couple of scenes. Paul Talbot’s book BRONSON’S LOOSE AGAIN has a chapter on the film, and he was able to interview Tompkins who told of just how much effort went into to her preparation. I recommend the book to anyone interested in Bronson or those numerous actors and actresses who worked with him in the 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s. Filmed the same year as MURPHY’S LAW, I thought it might be fun to see how committed she is in the role of the corrupt warden in Cannon’s THE NAKED CAGE. 

I’ll admit that I am not an expert on the “women in prison” genre of film. I did go through my Pam Grier phase that started with movies like COFFY (1972) and FOXY BROWN (1974), but did extend as deep as the Jack Hill “women in cages” films THE BIG DOLL HOUSE (1971) and THE BIG BIRD CAGE (1972). But those movies had Pam Grier in the cast which provided a couple of ample reasons for me to watch. THE NAKED CAGE does have some interesting things going for it. Like most of Charles Bronson’s 1980’s output, the movie was produced by Cannon Films, the international symbol of quality moviemaking from the 1980’s. And then there’s Angel Tompkins herself. She’s quite the sexy lady, having appeared in films like PRIME CUT (1972) and THE TEACHER (1974). Cannon Films and Angel Tompkins drew me in, but what about the film itself? Is it worth a watch? 

I’ll go ahead and say that for me, THE NAKED CAGE was worth the watch. This kind of movie only works for me if I like the cast. Shari Shattuck is appealing in the lead role of Michelle, a good woman, who’s wrongly convicted, but who soon finds levels of toughness she never knew she had in order to survive. I remember Shattuck starring in films like POINT OF SEDUCTION: BODY CHEMISTRY 3 (1994) with Andrew Stevens. My wife and I also watched the entire DALLAS TV series a few years ago where Shari had an extended role in season 13. She starts out here as a sweet and innocent lady, and by the end she’s wielding guns and knives like a lifelong delinquent, and I liked it! Angel Tompkins does not disappoint as the corrupt warden who seduces the inmates in order to meet her own sexual needs, as well as manipulating them into playing her larger games of control over the rest of the prison. Overall, she plays the role pretty straight, but is once again quite uninhibited when it comes to the more mature content. To me though, the most enjoyable performance comes from Christina Whitaker as the psychotic Rita. Not content with just ruining Michelle’s life, she’s determined to murder her behind the prison walls as well. From the beginning of the film where the fugitive Rita had Michelle’s estranged husband snorting cocaine off her boobs, all the way to the final frames, Whitaker chews every piece of scenery that comes into view. She’s the character I’ll remember whenever I think of THE NAKED CAGE. 

There are some things I didn’t like very much about the film. Prison guard Smiley’s sadistic rapist isn’t fun at all to watch, but his character’s fate is well deserved and somewhat satisfying when it finally occurs. Also, I didn’t care for the manipulation of the character of the drug addict Amy, played by Stacey Shaffer. She had worked very hard to beat her addiction, and in a world where many of us know people who have been lost to addiction, it’s not easy to watch her tragic fall. 

Overall, if you enjoy “women in prison” films, I think you’ll probably like this one. It’s certainly not perfect, but being a fan of Cannon Films and Angel Tompkins, I thought it was an enjoyable way to spend a Friday night while I was waiting for my wife to get home from work! 

Retro Television Review: St. Elsewhere 3.1 “Playing God, Part One”

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Welcome to Retro Television Reviews, a feature where we review some of our favorite and least favorite shows of the past! On Fridays, I will be reviewing St. Elsewhere, a medical show which ran on NBC from 1982 to 1988.  The show can be found on Daily Motion.

Today, we start the third season of St. Elsewhere with some new opening credits!

Episode 3.1 “Playing God, Part One”

(Dir by Bruce Paltrow, originally aired on September 19th, 1984)

The opening of the third season finds that St. Eligius is just as depressing as it’s ever been.

Fiscus leads a group of new residents, including Dr. Elliott Axelrod (played by new series regular Stephen Furst), through the hospital.  Fiscus comes across as being an arrogant jackass.  I guess that’s the appeal of being a second-year resident.  You get to look down on all of the first-years.

Jack is still dating Clancy (young Helen Hunt).  When Clancy tells Jack that she’s pregnant, he’s shocked when she says she’s planning on getting an abortion.  Jack proposes to her.  Clancy says she’s not ready to get married and she’s not ready to have a baby.

Dr. Craig is still yelling at Dr. Ehrlich.  Dr. Ehrlich is still annoying the nurses.

Speaking of the nurses, they’re going on strike!

Three firefighters (one of whom is played by Erin Hudson) are injured while on the job and are rushed to St. Eligius with severe burns.  Luckily, plastic surgeon Bobby Caldwell (Mark Harmon, without that terrible mustache he wore during season two) is on call.

Dr. Peter White is working in a shady clinic and is still suing for his right to be a resident.

A traffic accident leaves one nun in a coma and apparently brain-dead.  Sister Doemnica (Michael Learned) wants to take her off life-support.  Westphall (Ed Flanders), who seems even more depressed than usual, disagrees.  It looks like there’s going to be some conflict about this.  For once, I’m on Westphall’s side.  I’m believer in hope.

Auschlander is still battling his cancer.

In other words, it’s another day at St. Eligius.  The third season premiere did a good job of re-introducing viewers to the hospital.  The snarkiness of Fiscus’s tour nicely balanced all of the more dramatic moments in the episode.  If anything has me worried, it’s the possible return of the loathsome Peter White.  How is the hospital going to deal with the return of a man who they all know is a rapist, even if he was somehow acquitted?  I guess we’ll find out.

Review: Kraven the Hunter (dir. by J. C. Chandor)

Posted on by Arleigh

Kraven is Sony’s latest attempt to mine its Spider-Man-adjacent characters for cinematic gold, this time taking a stab at Sergei Kravinoff, better known as Kraven the Hunter. Even if you’re going in with rock-bottom expectations set by Morbius or the patchy Venom films, you might find yourself torn between mild intrigue and full-on indifference. The movie doesn’t bomb, but it certainly doesn’t soar either—it lands squarely in the “it’s fine, I guess” territory, buoyed by a handful of positive elements but weighed down by a laundry list of issues.

The film tries to position itself as a darker, grittier entry in Sony’s Spider-Man Universe but ultimately falls flat in several key areas. The movie follows Sergei Kravinoff (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), a man battling his toxic past and violent instincts, trying to define himself apart from his ruthless father, Nikolai (Russell Crowe). While Taylor-Johnson puts in a committed, physical performance and the action sequences deliver some visceral excitement—with brutal fight scenes and a snowy prison breakout standing out—the film struggles to transcend its predictable, shallow narrative.

One of the strongest aspects of Kraven is its commitment to visceral, intense action. The movie doesn’t shy away from bloody, fierce fights, embracing Kraven’s nature as a hunter rather than a hero. Physicality is a highlight here with Taylor-Johnson convincingly portraying the character’s power and agility. Some of the choreography—such as a snow-covered prison escape and a jungle chase—inject adrenaline into the movie, complemented by Russell Crowe’s imposing presence as the domineering father. Ariana DeBose’s Calypso and Alessandro Nivola’s Rhino provide interesting, if underdeveloped, counterparts that add flavor to the otherwise monochrome supporting cast.

However, the film is weighed down by a paint-by-numbers storyline that treads the well-worn path of antihero origin stories without adding fresh insight or emotional texture. The plot feels cliched and forgettable, with many moments so awkward and stilted that the dialogue and narrative flow could easily be accused of being AI-generated—and that accusation wouldn’t be out of place. This mechanical, artificial quality in the script creates a disconnect that makes characters seem like hollow archetypes rather than fully realized people. It’s as if the story was stitched together by a formula rather than human creativity, robbing the film of natural humor, depth, or emotional impact.

The biggest glaring example of this artificiality comes in the odd use of CGI for some of the characters’ facial movements. In particular, a scene with DeBose’s Calypso involved digital manipulation of her mouth and eyes to sync dialogue after filming, creating an uncanny, often distracting effect. This technique, reminiscent of the awkward, jarring movement of digitally animated mouths on still images, recalls the uncomfortable “Annoying Orange” vibe and highlights a troubling overreliance on technology rather than retakes or better production planning. It is a standout low point that further reinforces the impression of a rushed or overly engineered project.

The emotional core of Kraven revolves around the toxic father-son dynamic, which Crowe and Taylor-Johnson approach with convincing intensity, though the writing undermines their efforts with repetitive, obvious lines. The other characters, including Calypso, Rhino, and the Foreigner, suffer from limited screen time and one-dimensional arcs, often serving only to advance the plot mechanically rather than enrich the story. The film’s isolation from the broader Spider-Man universe also makes the stakes feel lower, leaving Kraven’s violent vendetta somewhat directionless and detached from broader consequences.

Visually, the film is inconsistent. While it nails gritty, physical action sequences, the CGI and digital alterations break immersion. The attempt at a darker, more grounded tone battles against these technical missteps and a narrative stuck in early-2000s superhero tropes.

Kraven offers some genuinely brutal action and committed performances but is hamstrung by a formulaic, AI-esque script and distracting technical glitches like the digital mouth-sync. It feels like a film caught between creative ambition and lazy execution, where flashes of potential are overwhelmed by awkward dialogue and uninspired plotting. For fans craving raw action or eager to see a Spider-Man villain on screen, it may be a mildly watchable diversion; for anyone seeking a fully fleshed-out, emotionally engaging story, Kraven is likely to disappoint.

Live Tweet Alert: Join #FridayNightFlix for Monty Python and the Holy Grail!

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

As some of our regular readers undoubtedly know, I am involved in a few weekly watch parties.  On Twitter, I host #FridayNightFlix every Friday and I co-host #ScarySocial on Saturday.  On Mastodon, I am one of the five hosts of #MondayActionMovie!  Every week, we get together.  We watch a movie.  We tweet our way through it.

Tonight, at 10 pm et, I will be hosting #FridayNightFlix and celebrating the event’s 5th birthday with an encore presentation!  The movie?  Monty Python and the Holy Grail!

If you want to join us this Friday, just hop onto twitter, find Legend on Prime, start the movie at 10 pm et, and use the #FridayNightFlix hashtag!  I’ll be there happily tweeting.  It’s a friendly group and welcoming of newcomers so don’t be shy.

See you there!

Review: Icefall (dir. by Stefan Ruzowitsky)

Posted on by Arleigh

“You don’t find redemption in warmth. You fight for it in the cold.” — Ani

Icefall (2025) is a survival thriller set deep in a frozen wilderness where Ani, a determined Indigenous game warden, and Harlan, a grizzled poacher, find themselves forced together to evade criminals hunting down a crashed plane’s cash stash. Their uneasy alliance forms the heart of the movie, supported by the biting cold, shifting ice, and relentless danger that keeps the tension alive throughout.

The film benefits significantly from its leads’ performances, especially Joel Kinnaman’s portrayal of Harlan. Kinnaman has become something of a seasoned veteran in this kind of gritty thriller and action role, having built a career playing characters who balance toughness with a hint of vulnerability. His familiarity with this genre brings a dependable authenticity to Harlan, who feels weathered but not worn out, someone who understands survival instinctively. Alongside Cara Jade Myers’ portrayal of Ani, their on-screen chemistry roots the film in more than just action beats, making their relationship genuinely engaging amid the harsh landscape.

Speaking of the environment, Icefall uses its setting as more than just a backdrop. The fragile ice and near-empty wilderness create natural obstacles that heighten the sense of peril, reinforcing the story’s theme that nature itself is an adversary. The melting ice becomes a constant threat, lending the narrative a slow-burning pressure that’s as effective as any chase or gunfight. This atmospheric tension is one area where the film really earns its keep, immersing viewers in the dangerous beauty of its frozen world.

However, Icefall stumbles when it comes to story originality and pacing. The film’s premise feels familiar—dangling on the edge of a formula that fans might recognize as similar to the 1993 Sylvester Stallone thriller Cliffhanger. While Cliffhanger had that film’s villain as a magnetic and complex antagonist, Icefall misses that mark. Its criminals lack charisma and depth, removing a vital layer of excitement and tension from the story. Without a compelling foil for Harlan and Ani, many confrontations fall flat, and the thriller’s pulse falters.

The plot is further weakened by a somewhat cluttered narrative, introducing a secret government biohazard subplot that feels shoehorned in and detracts from the simpler core survival story. Characters occasionally make choices that seem more dictated by the demands of the script rather than believable motivations. These factors lead to inconsistent pacing, which can frustrate viewers looking for a tight, focused thriller.

Visually, the film offers moments of stark beauty but is uneven technically. Some sequences perfectly capture the isolating chill and danger of the icy wild, while others suffer from abrupt editing and less convincing digital embellishments that distract from the intended immersion. The cinematography shifts between grand vistas and awkward close-ups, occasionally disrupting the flow of tension.

Characterization is uneven as well. Ani shines intermittently but sometimes veers into typical thriller protagonist territory, exhibiting moments of indecision or cliché. Kinnaman’s Harlan remains the more grounded and believable figure, benefiting from his extensive experience playing similar roles. Meanwhile, the villains fail to rise above stereotype, lacking the nuance or menace that could have made the story pulse with higher stakes.

Still, when the film settles into the rhythm of survival—the crunch of snow underfoot, the slow erosion of trust, the ever-present threat of dissolving ice—Icefall delivers a tense, atmospheric experience. It’s not a revelatory thriller, but it does offer enough grit and moodiness for a single viewing, especially for fans of cold-climate survival dramas.

Icefall is a mixed bag: it has strong performances, especially from Joel Kinnaman, who clearly knows the ropes of this genre and plays an experienced, weathered survivor with ease. The film’s use of environment is a big plus, giving it an edge that many thrillers lack. Yet it suffers from an unoriginal plot that recalls better films like Cliffhanger but without their charismatic antagonists, plus narrative distractions and technical inconsistencies. It’s an okay watch for those in the mood for a frosty thriller with solid leads but never quite rises to leave a lasting impression.